DOCSLIB.ORG

1665: London's Last Great Plague Transcript

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1665: London's Last Great Plague Transcript 1665: London's Last Great Plague Transcript Date: Wednesday, 30 September 2015 - 6:00PM Location: Museum of London 30 September 2015 1665: London’s Last Great Plague Professor Vanessa Harding Plague in early modern London has been the focus of many studies, but there still remain inconsistencies and puzzling elements in an apparently widely-accepted narrative. London experienced at least six epidemics of plague between 1563 and 1665, but they occurred at quite irregular intervals and their severity varied from episode to episode and from area to area. Although the quality and healthfulness of London’s built environment almost certainly deteriorated over the period, plagues did not get successively more lethal: 1665 saw the highest death-toll, but not the highest mortality in relation to population size. After 1666, plague disappeared entirely even though the metropolis continued to grow. The identification of the disease, and its association with rats and fleas, which has held sway for the last century, has come under increasingly sceptical scrutiny. So, in the 350th anniversary of what proved to be London’s last great plague year, this lecture will consider whether we really understand the epidemic any better than those who lived through it. Introduction The 350th anniversary year of the last great plague of London has not seen commemorations like those for Waterloo or Agincourt, let alone Magna Carta, but it is still a worthwhile opportunity for reflection. The story of the plague is probably very familiar to many, and there is a small library of books on the topic. The question I would like to explore tonight is, do we really understand the London plague epidemics of the 16th and 17th centuries any better than those who experienced them at first hand. I will concentrate on the plague of 1665, but the history and memory of earlier plagues are also important factors. The reason for the question is, of course, that modern understandings and indeed diagnoses of plague have changed a lot in the last thirty years. What I learned as a student is not what I now teach my own students. Partly it’s that historians’ approaches have changed – the impact and experience of plague are now foregrounded, and critically assessed – but also it is that the epidemiological consensus of the preceding century has more or less dissolved. Where once we felt confident that we knew what the disease was, and how it spread – and were able to condescend to the ignorance of our ancestors – we are now presented with a variety of possible scenarios, arguments both destructive and constructive, and some quite acerbic exchanges between their proponents. I will come back to those issues, but I want to begin with what early modern Londoners knew or believed about plague. Historic plague: contemporary knowledge The fact that early modern Londoners lacked what we would consider an adequate and accurate epidemiology of plague did not mean they were lost in a fog of ignorance, helplessly groping for information and reassurance. Londoners – and others - were quite well-informed about the appearance, progress, and even the history of the disease. They were showered with advice and instruction. The Bills of Mortality To start with there was a regular, officially-vetted, flow of information to the public, in the form of weekly handbills reporting the previous week’s deaths and causes of death. These documents were known as the Bills of Mortality; originating in the sixteenth century, they had become part of the pattern of London life by the early seventeenth. The weekly Bills were a collation of information from the 120-odd individual parishes. The clerk of each parish was responsible for collecting data from his own parish and reporting it to Parish Clerks’ Hall every Tuesday. Officials put the information from all the parishes together and made up and printed the Bills; copies went first to the Mayor and Aldermen and the Privy Council on Thursday morning, before being released for public sale. The weekly Bill was a double-sided sheet, with the week number and date at the head. The face or recto contained the information on burials and plague burials by parish, organised into groups – by 1665 these were the 97 parishes within the walls, the 16 parishes outside the walls but partly or wholly within the city’s jurisdiction, a wider circle of 10-12 parishes in Middlesex and Surrey, and a cluster of five Westminster parishes. New parishes had been added as the seventeenth century progressed, and the outer groupings somewhat reorganised, but this was the basic structure. The reverse or verso of the Bill contained a list of deaths by cause, aggregating the figures from all parishes, though sometimes leaving in some details especially for accidents; it noted how far burials had risen or fallen since the preceding week; and it also included information on the Assize of Bread, which specified the weight of a loaf of a particular price. Though comparatively few originals have survived, contemporary letters and diaries demonstrate their readership and use. The Bills were printed and distributed week in and week out, available both for an annual subscription of 4s., and for individual sale. They provided both a regular topic of conversation and subject for correspondence. John Chamberlain, frequent letter-writer of the late Elizabethan and early Stuart periods, often passed on information from the weekly bills to his correspondents; others enclosed copies with their letters. However, it was during plague epidemics that the Bills gained the largest and most avid readership. The principal justification for collecting the information was to be able to detect the onset of an epidemic – a sustained rise in weekly death totals in the early summer was a pretty good indication – so that those with responsibilities could plan their strategies. But ordinary Londoners became expert at assessing the implications of the weekly Bill, especially as it charted the spread of plague from parish to parish. Samuel Pepys first mentions reports and rumors of plague in his 1665 diary, and notes seeing houses shut up in Drury Lane, but as the epidemic progressed he clearly read the weekly bills and often notes the figures, using them to draw conclusions about the progress of the disease. The narrator of Daniel Defoe’s semi-fictional Journal of the Plague Year uses the weekly Bills to structure his story and shape its chronology, starting with the appearance of the disease in late 1664, and showing a keen awareness of the implications of numbers and geographical spread. Subsequently he includes quotations from the Bills in tabular form (indicating that Defoe, writing in 1720, had access to copies of the Bills from 1665). A complementary kind of publication – rushed into print to catch the market -was the commemorative or souvenir bill, carefully constructed typographically to catch the eye, with images or crosses, sustaining poetry or prayers, sometimes plague remedies, and weekly totals from earlier years for comparison. These were clearly published during rather than after the epidemic; one such (edged in black with a large black cross in the centre) was published on or just after 29 August 1665. Someone has carefully added in by hand the weekly totals for the rest of 1665 and well into 1666, suggesting a real interaction with the bill’s content. So the Bills provided material not just for immediate information, but also for reflection. Yearly bills were compiled from the weekly totals (in format they closely resemble the weekly bill; except that they have a more structured and synthesised account of causes of death other than plague). People who bought and studied the yearly bills, presumably published in late December or January, were not seeking fresh data of immediate import but rather the means to analyse and understand the epidemic in a more holistic way. Demographic analysis and explanation The first and greatest exponent of the bills as a source for demographic theory was Captain John Graunt, by trade a haberdasher, who in 1662 published a treatise entitled Natural and Political Observations … upon the Bills of Mortality. Graunt combined an historical perspective with a mathematical/actuarial approach to the numerical data, categorising and comparing, to demonstrate unsuspected truths and demolish myths. He aggregated and analysed the bills data to show annual mortality levels and change over time, the prevalence and cycles of various diseases and causes of death, the health of country and city. He pointed out that some causes of death varied little from year to year, while others swung widely. Of plague, ‘that greatest Disease, or Casualty of all’, he noted that there had been (at the time) four times of great mortality, of which (in his view) 1603 and 1625 were the most severe (he did not have figures for 1563, which we now think was probably the worst relative to London’s size). He argued that not all deaths due to plague were so reported, so the true figures might be 25- 30% more than the Bills indicated. He also noted that some ‘plagues’ lasted a single year, while others dragged out over several, and that deaths attributed to fevers and similar infections increased in plague years and also in the preceding year. Graunt’s book was popular and well-received; though only a modest tradesman, he was elected to the Royal Society on the strength of it. The book went into several editions (Pepys had the third edition, published by the Royal Society), and encouraged others to produce (or pirate) similar works. One of these was published as Reflections on the weekly Bills of Mortality ... which seems to be a pastiche of extracts from Graunt with the yearly bill for 1665 appended.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • London and Middlesex in the 1660S Introduction: the Early Modern
    London and Middlesex in the 1660s Introduction: The early modern metropolis first comes into sharp visual focus in the middle of the seventeenth century, for a number of reasons. Most obviously this is the period when Wenceslas Hollar was depicting the capital and its inhabitants, with views of Covent Garden, the Royal Exchange, London women, his great panoramic view from Milbank to Greenwich, and his vignettes of palaces and country-houses in the environs. His oblique birds-eye map- view of Drury Lane and Covent Garden around 1660 offers an extraordinary level of detail of the streetscape and architectural texture of the area, from great mansions to modest cottages, while the map of the burnt city he issued shortly after the Fire of 1666 preserves a record of the medieval street-plan, dotted with churches and public buildings, as well as giving a glimpse of the unburned areas.1 Although the Fire destroyed most of the historic core of London, the need to rebuild the burnt city generated numerous surveys, plans, and written accounts of individual properties, and stimulated the production of a new and large-scale map of the city in 1676.2 Late-seventeenth-century maps of London included more of the spreading suburbs, east and west, while outer Middlesex was covered in rather less detail by county maps such as that of 1667, published by Richard Blome [Fig. 5]. In addition to the visual representations of mid-seventeenth-century London, a wider range of documentary sources for the city and its people becomes available to the historian.
    [Show full text]
  • The Politics of the Coronavirus and Its Impact on International Relations
    Vol. 14(3), pp. 116-125, July-September 2020 DOI: 10.5897/AJPSIR2020.1271 Article Number: FA1630564661 ISSN: 1996-0832 Copyright ©2020 African Journal of Political Science and Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/AJPSIR International Relations Full Length Research Paper The politics of the coronavirus and its impact on international relations Bheki Richard Mngomezulu Department of Political Science, Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, University of the Western Cape, South Africa. Received 7 June, 2020; Accepted 1 July, 2020 Pandemic outbreaks are not a new phenomenon globally. There is plethora of evidence to substantiate this view. However, each epidemic has its own defining features, magnitude, and discernible impact. Societies are affected differently. The coronavirus or COVID-19 is not an incongruity. Although it is still active, thus making detailed empirical data inconclusive, it has already impacted societies in many ways - leaving indelible marks. Regarding methodology, this paper is an analytic and exploratory desktop study which draws evidence from different countries to advance certain arguments. It is mainly grounded in political science (specifically international relations) and history academic disciplines. Firstly, the paper begins by looking at how the coronavirus has affected international relations – both positively and negatively. Secondly, using examples from different countries, it argues that the virus has exposed the political leadership by bringing to bear endemic socio-economic inequalities which result in citizens responding differently to government regulations meant to flatten the curve of infection. Thirdly, in the context of Africa, the paper makes a compelling argument that some of the socio-economic situations found within the continent are remnants of colonialism and apartheid.
    [Show full text]
  • A JOURNAL of the PLAGUE YEAR (Revisited Classics)1
    HYGEIA, Revista Brasileira de Geografia Médica e da Saúde - www.hygeia.ig.ufu.br/ ISSN: 1980-1726 A JOURNAL OF THE PLAGUE YEAR (revisited classics)1 By Daniel Defoe being observations or memorials of the most remarkable occurrences, as well public as private, which happened in London during the last great visitation in 1665. Written by a Citizen who continued all the while in London. Never made public before It was about the beginning of September, 1664, that I, among the rest of my neighbors, heard in ordinary discourse that the plague was returned again in Holland; for it had been very violent there, and particularly at Amsterdam and Rotterdam, in the year 1663, whither, they say, it was brought (some said from Italy, others from the Levant) among some goods which were brought home by their Turkey fleet; others said it was brought from Candia; others, from Cyprus. It mattered not from whence it came; but all agreed it was come into Holland again. We had no such thing as printed newspapers in those days, to spread rumors and reports of things, and to improve them by the invention of men, as I have lived to see practiced since. But such things as those were gathered from the letters of merchants and others who corresponded abroad, and from them was handed about by word of mouth only; so that things did not spread instantly over the whole nation, as they do now. But it seems that the government had a true account of it, and several counsels were held about ways to prevent its coming over; but all was kept very private.
    [Show full text]
  • Microbiology E-Journal
    From the Principal’s Desk I would like to congratulate the entire team of Department of Microbiology for their wonderful though very strenuous attempt to publish a journal exclusively for the students. Presently the e-version of the journal is going to be released on auspicious day of 5th September, i.e. the Teacher's Day. I hope, later on the print version will be published. In my perception it is a tribute to the entire faculty members by the students because these write ups simply say that how much they assimilate from their teachers in this subject. We all know and still experiencing a very stressful as well as fearful daily life due to the pandemic. We came to know many information regarding this covid-19 virus from many microbiologists not only from India but also from other countries like Canada, USA and many more. The Department of Microbiology, Vijaygarh Jyotish Ray College produced many students who are pursuing their research in India as well as abroad. In response to the call from their teachers they shared their knowledge with us in many webinars organized by the department. In my perception all the students of this department are budding scientist of future. No one knows it may so happen that we come to know that one of our students succeed to be associated with the invention of any life-saving drug or vaccine. Once again, I want thank all students and faculties for initiating this attempt and hope that this will continue to publish. Dr. Rajyasri Neogy, Principal, Vijaygarh Jyotish Ray College Contents Paper Title Page No.
    [Show full text]
  • Corona and Other Virus: Their Useful and Harmful Aspects
    Current Trends on Biotechnology & Microbiology DOI: ISSN: 2641-6875 10.32474/CTBM.2020.02.000129Review Article Corona and Other Virus: Their Useful and Harmful Aspects Birhanu Gizaw* Microbial Biodiversity Directorate, Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute, Ethiopia *Corresponding author: Birhanu Gizaw, Microbial Biodiversity Directorate, Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 30726, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Received: June 15, 2020 Published: September 22, 2020 Abstract How the single virus is forceful and shakes the world is eyewitness during this contemporary COVID 19 pandemic time. People primarily think of viruses such as HIV, Ebola, Zika, Influenza, Tobacco mosaic virus or whatever new outbreak like SARS, Corona are Understandingall viruses worst the and microbial non-beneficial. world isHowever, very critical not all and viruses crucial are thing detrimental that they and are influential driving force to human, and governing animal and the plantphysical health. world In fact, some viruses have beneficial properties for their hosts in a symbiotic relationship and scientific research in many disciplines. industry,and biosphere agriculture, at all. Thehealth virus and and environment other microbial are the life application those of bacteria, of microbes fungi, andprion, their viroid, products virion are are too requiring high for great human attention being and researchenvironment. to enhance Without their microbes utilization all lifefrom would majority be cease of useful on earth.aspects However, of microbial some genetic microbes resource. are very The dangerous secret behind like of Corona every virus, HIV, Ebola, Mycobacterium and others that destroy human life, but majority of microorganisms are too useful to promote virusdevelopment. in respect Through with health, building environment, and strengthening agriculture microbial and biotechnological culture collection application centers during and through this Covid19 strong pandemic conservation time strategy, to raise awarenessit is possible about to exploit virus atmore all.
    [Show full text]
  • During the Great Plague of London (1665-1666)
    Learning Intention: To discover some simple facts about the Great Plague of London. By the end of this session, I will have completed an exercise and be able to recall at least two facts about the Great Plague. During the Great Plague of London (1665-1666), the disease called the bubonic plague killed almost one quarter of London's population (one out of every four Londoners). At its worst, in September of 1665, the plague killed 7,165 people – about 71 times the number of staff and students in our school) in one week. After this, the number of people dying from the plague began to slow down. Around September of 1666, the great outbreak ended. The Great Fire of London, which happened on 2-3 September 1666, may have helped end the outbreak by killing many of the rats and fleas who were spreading the plague. Though most of the people who died during the Great Plague lived in London, the plague also killed people in other areas of England. By the time the Great Plague ended, about 2.5% of England's population had died from the plague. To compare, about 2% of the entire United Kingdom's population (including soldiers and civilians) died in World War I, and about 1% of the entire United Kingdom's population died in World War II. Use your fact file above to answer the following questions about the Great Plague. Write your answers in full sentences using correct punctuation: 1. How many years did the Great Plague last? 2. What percentage of Londoners died of the plague? 3.
    [Show full text]
  • London Plague Statistics in 1665
    Journal of Of®cial Statistics, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1998, pp. 207±234 London Plague Statistics in 1665 D. R. Bellhouse1 Weekly Bills of Mortality for the City of London were published from the beginning of the seventeenth century. The impetus for the collection and publication of these data came from periodic outbreaks of the bubonic plague in the city. John Graunt, the father of statistical science, based his work Natural and Political Observations upon the Bills of Mortality on the published statistics. For the plague of 1593 in London, it is shown here that all published data, except for perhaps some yearly totals, have been constructed. Examination of the constructed data provides some insight into statistical thinking in the seventeenth century. Some aspects of the accuracy of the Bills of Mortality are also discussed as well as the statistical insights into the Bills of Mortality by some of Graunt's contemporaries. Key words: Data collection; history of statistics; reporting errors; scienti®c fraud; undercounting errors. 1. Introduction and Background John Graunt (1620±1674) is generally acknowledged as the father of statistical science for his Natural and Political Observations upon the Bills of Mortality. The book went through four editions in his lifetime (Graunt 1662a,b; 1665a,b), the last two published during an outbreak of the bubonic plague in London. Graunt based his ®ndings on the mortality statistics that had been regularly collected in London by the Company of Parish Clerks. The collection of mortality statistics, especially those relating to the plague, in the City of London date from the early sixteenth century.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mathematics of Diseases (SCNC1001)
    The mathematics of diseases – On Modeling Hong Kong’s SARS Outbreak Dr. Tuen Wai Ng Department of Mathematics, HKU Content Basic Epidemic Modeling SIR Model My Recent works on Modeling of the SARS propagation in Hong Kong Infectious disease modeling Epidemics: rat flea Black Death Europe lost 1/3 of population in 1347 - 1350. Great Plague of London, 1664–66. Killed more than 75,000 of total population of 460,000. Infectious disease modeling Epidemics: Influenza influenza virus killed 25 million in 1918-19 in Europe Infectious disease modeling Epidemics: AIDS virus AIDS Coronavirus SARS Infectious disease modeling Epidemics: bovine spongiform encephalopathy (mad cow disease) Chicken flu Infectious disease modeling Mathematical models can: predict rate of spread, peak, etc., of epidemics predict effects of different disease control strategies . The WHO's eradication project reduced smallpox (variola) deaths from two million in 1967 to zero in 1977–80. Smallpox was officially declared smallpox eradicated in 1979. virus First Infection Latency to transmission occurs infectious to another transition susceptible Individual’s disease Immune / state : Susceptible Latent Infectious Removed time t t t t t Epoch : A B C D E Incubation period Individual no longer infectious to Serial interval susceptibles (recovery or Symptoms removal) appear Note : tD is constrained to lie in the interval (tB , tE), so tD > tC (as shown) and tD < tC are both possible. Basic Assumptions of the simplest epidemic model, the SIR model Population size is large and constant - No birth,death,immigration or emigration No latency Homogeneous mixing - that is each pair of individuals has equal probability of coming into contact with one another (this is reasonable for a school or households in a building).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Notes Introduction 1. Abraham Cowley, ‘To the Royal Society’, ll. 41–46, quoted in Francis Bacon, The Essays, or Counsels, Civil and Moral (London: Knapton, 1691), sig. A3v. Swift owned this edition (see LRJS, I, 125–26). On the Miltonic parallels, see Robert B. Hinman, Abraham Cowley’s World of Order (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 189–90. 2. See, for instance, Richard G. Olson, ‘Tory-High Church Opposition to Science and Scientism in the Eighteenth Century: The Works of John Arbuthnot, Jonathan Swift, and Samuel Johnson’, in The Uses of Science in the Age of Newton, ed. John G. Burke (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), pp. 171–204. 3. Cowley, ‘To the Royal Society’, l. 59. See Francis Bacon, Novum Organum (1620), ‘Plan of the Work’, sig. B4v, in The Instauratio magna Part II: Novum organum and Associated Texts, ed. and trans. Graham Rees with Maria Wakely (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004), p. 33. 4. See Charles Webster, The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine, and Reform, 1626–1660 (London: Duckworth, 1975), esp. p. 96. 5. See John R. R. Christie, ‘Laputa Revisited’, in Nature Transfigured: Science and Literature, 1700–1900, eds Christie and Sally Shuttleworth (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989), pp. 45–60, and Brian Vickers, ‘Swift and the Baconian Idol’, in The World of Jonathan Swift: Essays for the Tercentenary, ed. B. Vickers (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1968), pp. 87–128. There has been general disagreement, however, with Vickers’s argument that ‘Bacon stood for many things that Swift detested’, and that Swift’s allusions were intended to mock Bacon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Plague 1665- 1666 How Did London Respond to It?
    The National Archives Education Service The Great Plague 1665- 1666 How did London respond to it? London scenes of the Plague 1665-1666 – Museum of London The Great Plague 1665-1666 How did London respond? Introduction Lesson at a Glance The Plague This was the worst outbreak of plague in England since the black death Suitable For: KS3 of 1348. London lost roughly 15% of its population. While 68,596 deaths were recorded in the city, the true number was probably over Time Period: 100,000. Other parts of the country also suffered. Early Modern 1485-1750 The earliest cases of disease occurred in the spring of 1665 in a parish outside the city walls called St Giles-in-the-Fields. The death rate Curriculum Link: began to rise during the hot summer months and peaked in September The development of when 7,165 Londoners died in one week. Church, state and society Rats carried the fleas that caused the plague. They were attracted by in Britain 1509-1745 city streets filled with rubbish and waste, especially in the poorest areas. Society, economy and culture across the period Those who could, including most doctors, lawyers and merchants, fled Learning Objective: the city. Charles II and his courtiers left in July for Hampton Court and then Oxford. Parliament was postponed and had to sit in October at Oxford, the increase of the plague being so dreadful. Court cases were To closely examine a also moved from Westminster to Oxford. document in order to discover information. The Lord Mayor and aldermen (town councillors) remained to enforce the King’s orders to try and stop the spread of the disease.
    [Show full text]
  • Bills of Mortality
    BILLS OF MORTALITY BY WILLIAM A. BREND, M.A., M.B., B .Sc. / 4 .* [Reprinted from Transactions of the Medico-Legal Society, 1907 — 1908 ] LONDON BAILLIEEE, TINDALL AND COX 8, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN 1908 t l 3694 Year this Burials the in Decreafed ) BILLS OF MORTALITY. The custom of recording births, marriages, and deaths is of very ancient origin. In Genesis v. and xi. are given the births, ages, and deaths of the descendants of Adam to the birth of Noah, and from Noah to the twelve patriarchs. Moses counted the Israelites, and recorded the numbers of each of the tribes. Nehemiah, after “ the return from the Captivity in Babylon, says : I found the book of the genealogy of them which came up at the first ” (vii. 5). In Borne, a register of deaths (ratio LibUince was kept in the temple of Libitina, the goddess of the dead, and a regulation, ascribed to Scrvius Tullius, required that for every death a piece of money, known as the lucar Libitince, should be deposited in the temple. Marcus Aurelius ordained that all free persons should give notice of a birth within thirty days, and a record of these was kept in the temple of Saturn. In medieval times, registers appear to have been kept in France as early as 1308, but not much can be learned ^about them. In Spain, Cardinal Ximenes in 1497 ordered registers to be kept in every parish, in order to terminate the disorders arising from the marriage of persons between whom there was spiritual affinity. Parish registers in England were first instituted by Thomas Cromwell in 1538.
    [Show full text]
  • Carolyn Merchant the WOMEN, ECOLOGY, and the SCIENTIFIC
    Carolyn Merchant THE OF AT WOMEN, ECOLOGY, AND THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION tfj 1817 Harper & Row, Publi$hers, San Francisco New York, Grand Rapids, Philadelphia, St. Louis London, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto Acknowledgment is made fur the permission of the Journal of the History of Phi­ losophy to include a revised version of the author's article "The Vitalism of Anne Conway" (July 1979) in Chapter 11; of Ambix to include parts of the author's article "The Vitalism of Francis Mercury Van Helmont" (November 1979) in Chapters 4 and 11; of Indiana University Press. to reprint from Metamorphoses by Publius Ovid, translated by Rolfe Humphries (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1955); and of Cornell University Press to reprint tables on p. 312 from William E. Monter, Witchcraft in France and Switzerland. Copyright © 1976 by Cornell University. THE DEATH OF NATURE: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution. Copyright © 1980 by Carolyn Merchant. PREFACE: 1990 copyright© 1989 by Carolyn Mer­ chant. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written per­ mission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information address Haroer & Row, Publishers, Inc., 10 East 53rd Street, New York, NY 10022. FIRST HARPER & ROW PAPERBACK EDITION PUBLISHED IN 1983. Designed by Paul Quin Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Merchant, Carolyn. The death of nature. Originally published in 1980; with new preface. Includes bibliographical references. l . Women in science. 2. Philosophy of nature. 3. Human ecology.
    [Show full text]